New I Need A Loan Shark

Jorge Larrosa. Learn by ear.

relationship with text reading experience Jorge Larrosa, I was captivated and provoked many questions and concerns, which I have devoted myself to search the web, books, conferences, articles, presentations, videos and more., Professor Larry the purposes of increasing knowledge of its proposal, which is encompassing and comprehensive, as it relates and fuses at all times, experience and training in literature, education, travel, language and thought, and of course, with the three actions which are performed by the above-reading, writing, studying.

Here we let one of the many texts of this thinker can be downloaded from the Internet.

ear Learning

Jorge Larrosa
Professor of Pedagogy. Universitat de Barcelona

Intervention in the cycle of debates Settlement by demolition: reading, writing and thinking about college,
organized by Centre in Barcelona in April 2008.

Since the first of interventions in these debates has been hearing some vindication of the classroom as a meeting place not only knowledge but also of bodies and languages, some claim, say, of going to school like that go to a place where knowledge is present, are present, and where the languages \u200b\u200bare embodied, take shape. And it has also been hearing some claim the speech, a word, the "what" of transmission, compared to the privilege of "how" of method, procedures. Perhaps one of the university characteristics is the solution that comes

the classroom (the end of the body to go to class today), and the subordination of what transmission method it (the demolition of the logos). The title of my contribution has to do with the classroom with the language and the body. In fact taken from a piece of Maria Zambrano, specifically Clearings where speaks of the classrooms as places where the voice is to be learned by ear "[1]. A very beautiful piece about the word you hear, heard, and concludes that good students do not go to school to ask, much less to answer, but to listen. And I'll take that as an excuse Zambranian reason for your consideration of how learning is one that is confused with listening, and to what extent the university that is not a certain cancellation of voice and a final sound If the university is not involved, ultimately, the inability to learn by ear.

I'm not talking strictly of the lecture, though of course it bothers me that the manual supposedly "liberal" in the methodology of the university teaching have demonized again and again insisting on such topics as student passivity, boredom, sterility rote knowledge or even that which students are unable to attend for more than twenty minutes at a time or can not endure for an hour and a half still and silent. In a document prepared by

the advisory team of the pilot of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Girona is said to be the favorite word in the local ICE workshops to refer to the lecture is "vomit." The master class is where the teachers "vomit" which is written in the books [2]. And me, what they want

tell you, I hate to say or to think that what comes out of the teacher's mouth words but not vomiting.

But I am not going to talk about the lecture, but the voice of the classroom as a place of voice. And the voice, to put it briefly, there is nothing else than the mark of subjectivity in language. In the last debate, Violeta Núñez Benjamin quoted to say that, for transmission to occur, the language must be marked with the transmitting, that in the transmission, the tongue is tied to the speaker's experience and expertise the listener, the avatars, in short, of the subjects. And the voice is that brand, that experience, those avatars that make speaking and listening, the givers and the receivers are about specific subjects, singular and finite, flesh and blood, and not only communication equipment (senders and receivers of meaning) or cognitive machines (encoders and decoders of information.)

Voice, then, would be as sensitive face of the tongue, this makes the language is not only intelligible, that is not all of it on the side of meaning, that is not only an effective and transparent communication, that is not just a mechanical voice, no one inside, who says things like "your snuff, thank you" or "unleaded gasoline has chosen you," or "for security reasons this conversation is being taxed." In relation to the reduction of language communication tool, José Luis Pardo

talk that "there is an ongoing attempt to rid the language of his uncomfortable thickness, an attempt to erase the words any taste and any resonance, the attempt to impose by violence plain language, no stains, no shadows, no wrinkles, no body, the outspoken language, a language with no other in which no one listens to himself when he speaks, an uninhabited language [3] . The voice would then be something like the flavor and resonance of language, his wrinkles, his spots, his shadow, his body.

I'm not talking about the lecture, not even, strictly, of orality, but the subjective component of the language here I am calling "voice" and that is also, without doubt, in writing. There are writing to voice the same way that there is no voice master classes. Peter Handke, speaking of fatigue in the classroom, said in an exemplary manner:

"I will never again meet men less possessed by what they had in hand that those professors and lecturers University, any employee of the bank, yeah, whatever, counting the bills, some bills were not theirs also, any worker who was paving a street in the hot space that lay between the sun above, and boiling tar, below, they seemed to be more in what they did. Dignitaries seemed filled with sawdust or wonder who (...), or the enthusiasm or affection, or a questioning attitude or reverence, or anger, or indignation, or the consciousness of knowing something they had never shake voice, rather just go dropping a mantra, to move up with different files, to go dysarthric sentences in the tone of someone who is anticipating a

review (...) while out in front of the windows, were shades of green and blue, then dark, until exhaustion of the listener, in a sudden, it turned into apathy, and reluctance to hostility "[4].

The subject, the speaker, which is present in what he says, his voice trembles. And that thrill has to do with the relationship each has with the text: with admiration and enthusiasm, with affection, with the questioning attitude, with the reverence with anger, with indignation, with the awareness which is much, much more importantly, we do not know what we know.

Antoni Marí

As said last week, I do not know what the University, much less what should be. But a few years ago I live one corner trying to pay attention to what happens and what happens to me. And what happens, at least in the corner of the University in which I live, in the Faculty of Education, is that it is imposing a purely communicative language or information. And neutralized neutral language that does not feel nothing and feel nothing, ie, anesthetic and anesthesia, to which nothing happens, that is apathetic, a language without a single tone or tone, ie, unstressed or monotonous, a language deserted, with no one inside, a language that no one is aimed at anyone, a language without a voice, literally lost his voice, a language without a subject that can only be the language of

who have no language. What I see, dear friends, is the triumph of the foul-mouthed. Some who have always been outspoken, and always will be, but now claim the right to tell others what we have to use language and how we use it.

A friend told me long ago that a university classroom is a place where certain words or ideas, pass from the teacher's crumpled papers papers brand-new to students, without past or the heart or the head or the body or the soul, neither the teacher nor the students. I would not say that it is vomiting. But I feel there can not be learned by ear because nobody speaks and nobody listens. And what strikes me is that new methodologies, those that no longer pass through the classroom or the lecture, or by the notes, even for the role, learning enshrine this no voice, no subject in the to write and read has to do strictly with the reporting, management information and, at best, with opinion. Not long ago, in a seminar on reading, an influential professor of Education said that reading is decoded and decoding only. To me it amazes me that a professor is not saying a lot, that's something that happened a lifetime (the chairs have never been protected from the stupidity, but rather the opposite), but the mix of arrogance and ignorance which the new managers of education are wiping out everything that does not understand.

And what we can do, I think, is to give our language. And the worst thing would be that we, the teachers, entregásemos (beings are in fact quite cowardly, servile and prone to all kinds of genuflection, and we have delivered many things), but if we deliver the language, we are also providing at the same time, the language of the students and the possibility that those who come with, they also own voice, its own language, one's own thought, to speak and think in Ultimately, self-employed, do not delegate their language and thought. And yes we have no right.

The reduction of language communication is what makes the classroom and more than voice. Classrooms, of course, are not silent. The disappearance of the voice is correlated to the disappearance of silence. In classrooms is increasing talk, it is felt more and more. Everyone has the right

the word, but one word more and more banal, more neutral, more irresponsible, more empty. What happens, what I hear happens is that the voice is disappearing from the classroom and is being replaced by the constant and continuous chatter of information and opinion. It is also said here that the slogan is

replacing the theory and research is increasingly given to political agendas, economic and media that are in fi nal, which venden.Lo heard in the classroom is just common sense conversation. And it is increasingly difficult to feel that the words weighed, with density and incarnation, because what they do, at least in this corner of the university that I know, is floating in a vacuum. What happens, what I hear happens is the rapid and unimpeded progress of a complex set of discursive and regulatory procedures aimed at the destruction of language, what language can still be critical and complex experience of the world.

I once read a joke from The Broken in which a father told his son not to use both the word "democracy" because he was going to notice it was a fascist. To me it seems that something similar happening now with the word dialogue. has never been spoken dialog more and yet, dialogue has never been so short, so rare. In the words of Peter Handke, Peter Handke again:

"It's a time in space, in the 'ether', you only hear the hum, hiss, the thunder of dialogue. In all channels continuously hear the roar of the word 'dialogue'. According to the latest researches of dialogical research, a discipline that has just taken an identity and which boasts of having very quickly gained a multitude of followers, the word 'dialogue', and not just in the media, synods interfaith and summaries fi philosophers, is now more prevalent than 'I', 'today', 'life' (or 'death'), 'eye' (or 'ear),' mountain '(or' valley '),' bread ' (or 'wine'). Even in the walks of inmates by the prison yard, often 'dialogue' comes more often than, say, 'shit', 'fuck' or 'my mother's pussy', and similarly, in rides watched the inmates of a madhouse, or idiots, there is evidence that 'dialogue' is a word at least

ten times more frequently than, say, 'Man in the Moon', 'apple' (or 'pear'), 'God' (or 'Satan'), 'fear' (or 'pills'). In a continued dialogue are even three or four farmers who remain separated forever a day trip, or at least they are presented with non-stop dialogue, and dialogue is also presented to the children, until the last picture in picture books Children who have passed the entrance exam in school "[5].

university classrooms are also presented as a dialog uninterrupted. And that does seem to like the champions of the new methods. Although this is, in many cases, a talk from anyone, or any, in which speakers or listeners are merely asking arcades, to comment, and respond. What I hear in these dialogues, there is nothing that socialization in the language of the foul-mouthed, in that language, it seems, is most useful for research, for

international meetings and, of course, is much better on the power points and television debates.

also know that language determines thought and that shapes our experience of the world. So when imposing certain languages, are also imposed certain modes of thought (those under which thinking is an opinion, or argue, or worse, charge ratio) and certain forms of experience of the real. I have the feeling that learning the language of anyone, of that language without voice, is fully functional to the learning of certain forms of behavior. The rhetoric of professionalism, skills, procedures, builds interchangeable individuals, completely confused by his function, and individuals also constantly readjust adaptable and flexible, they say now. So the cast of voice is essential to empty the subject and, ultimately, so that education becomes a training in ways of working.

I started quoting Zambrano, and I will also end with her returning to the issue of "jitter" that had already appeared in this quote from tiredness in the classroom. In smaller text, but very beautiful, which is called "The teacher mediation" María Zambrano Refers immediately prior to start talking in class. The teacher says Zambrano, takes its place out, maybe some books of the portfolio and puts before him, and right there, before uttering a word, the teacher perceives the silence and stillness of the class what that silence and stillness that have question and waiting, and demanding. At that time, the teacher is silent for a moment and offer their presence even more than his word. And there María Zambrano says: "It could perhaps be measured by the authenticity of one teacher for that moment of silence that precedes his word for that note, for that introduction of the person before you start to give it in active mode. And yet by imperceptible tremor that shakes him. Without them, the teacher becomes so great as is his knowledge "[6]. Before we start talking, the teacher shakes. And that thrill is derived from its presence. In his silent presence, at the time, and the imminence of its presence in what is going to say. That is surely the voice, presence in what is said, the presence of a person who trembles at what it says. And so the classrooms are, or have been at times, or could have been, more voice, because these students and teachers had to be present. Both in his words and his silences. Perhaps, above all, in their silence.

Notes [1] Maria Zambrano, Clearings. Barcelona. Seix Barral 1977. P. 16.

[2] Universitat de Girona. Faculty of Arts. Noves methodologies, velles ideologies.
Reflections on university education in the context of the creation d'un espai europeu d'Educació superior. (Mimeo).

[3] José Luis Pardo, "Meat of words" in N. Quesada Fernández (Ed.), José Ángel Valente.
Anatomy of the word. Valencia. Pre.textos 2000. P. 190.

[4] Peter Handke, Essay on fatigue. Madrid. Alliance 1990. Pp. 13-14.

[5] Peter Handke, The loss of the image, or through the Sierra de Gredos. Madrid. Alliance 2003. Pp. 108 -
109.


[6] María Zambrano, "The mediation of the teacher" in J. Larrosa and S. Fenoglio (Eds.), María Zambrano: L'art de les mediacions
(Texts pedagogics). Barcelona. Publicacions Universitat de Barcelona 2002.
p. 112.